Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Oscar and Oscar− are distinct logical objects at t'

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The Necessity of Distinctness presupposes that identity is determinate, but vague objects can make identity indeterminate rather than strictly false.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Oscar− is a vague object whose boundaries are indeterminate, its distinctness from Oscar at t is itself indeterminate, not a settled logical fact.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Indeterminate identity propagates through time, so ND cannot yield a determinate verdict of distinctness at t' from an indeterminate basis at t.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.On four-dimensionalist ontology, Oscar and Oscar− are distinct temporal worms that share all their temporal parts prior to t', making them identical at t' as a matter of mereological convergence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Oscar and Oscar− are wholly co-located four-dimensional entities at t', the claim of distinctness collapses into a violation of the Indiscernibility of Identicals, not a vindication of it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.At t, Oscar and Oscar− are distinct logical objects
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.By the Necessity of Distinctness (ND), if two objects are distinct at one time, they are distinct at all times at which they exist
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Both Oscar and Oscar− survive the loss of the tail and exist at t'
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.